DOCSLIB.ORG

Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP) Integrated Pest Management Plan Contents 1.0 Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP) .................................................................................. 1 A. Policy ................................................................................................................................................... 2 B. IPMP Goals ........................................................................................................................................ 3 2.0 Pest Control As-needed ................................................................................................................... 3 A. Guidelines for Pest Treatment ......................................................................................................... 4 B. Guidelines for Pesticide Selection .................................................................................................. 4 1. Development of Reduced-Risk List of Pesticides allowed for Use on CITY Property ............ 4 2. Chemical Prohibitions for the Pesticide List .................................................................................. 4 3. Limited Use Exemptions .................................................................................................................. 5 3.0 CONTRACTS, NOTIFICATION, AND RECORDKEEPING ......................................................... 6 A. Contracts............................................................................................................................................. 6 B. Notifications ........................................................................................................................................ 6 C. Recordkeeping................................................................................................................................... 6 4.0 DEFINITIONS....................................................................................................................................... 7 5.0 APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................................... 8 A. Resources........................................................................................................................................... 8 B. Forms .................................................................................................................................................. 9 Table 1 - City of Fort Bragg Reduced-Risk Pesticide List………………………………………………………….…10 Exemption Form……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 Training Log…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………….21 Pesticide Application Log……………………………………………………………………………………………..…………..22 1.0 Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP) The Integrated Pest Management Plan (IPMP) is intended to provide a basis for a pest management program that will protect public health, as well as water quality, and non- target plants and animals. The goal of the CITY’s IPMP is to utilize the most environmentally sound approaches to pest management, and to reduce the volume and toxicity of chemical pest control treatments. The Phase II Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit (hereafter MS4), requires the CITY to Integrated Pest Management Plan Page 1 of 22 November 2019 implement a landscape design and maintenance program to reduce the amount of water and pesticides used during CITY operations and activities. In accordance with the MS4, the CITY must evaluate pesticide use and application activities performed and then implement practices that reduce the discharge of pesticides. By implementing the IPMP the CITY will comply with the pesticide‐related landscape management measures. This policy shall be adopted/amended by Resolution, posted in its current form on the CITY’s website, and the Ordinances regulating this plan are contained in the following Fort Bragg Municipal Code Sections: . Chapter 6.10 Weed Abatement Procedures . Chapter 6.11 Integrated Pest Management . Coastal Land Use And Development Code Chapter 17.34 Landscaping Standards . Inland Land Use And Development Code Chapter 18.34 Landscaping Standards A. Policy All pest management on CITY property will adhere to industry best practices, reduce or eliminate pesticide applications to the maximum extent feasible, and include all reasonable measures to protect human and environmental health. All persons acting on the CITY’s behalf, shall be familiar with the content and principles of this policy, receive training, and provide accurate records in accordance with this Integrated Pest Management Plan. 1. Departments performing pest management will comply with the CITY's IPMP. This policy will apply to all property, rights of way, or easements owned, by the CITY. 2. The CITY encourages residents to utilize this policy in application of pesticides, it does not however regulate pesticide use on private properties. Informational resources can be found in the Appendix of this IPMP. 3. Departments will require contractors providing pest management services to the CITY to comply with the CITY's IPMP. All pesticide application on CITY property performed by contractors shall be done in accordance with this policy. Contractor requirements are further described Section 3.0 Contracts of this IPMP. 4. No pesticides or fertilizers shall be applied during irrigation or within 48 hours of predicted rainfall with greater than 50% probability as predicted by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 5. The CITY will annually maintain a list of reduced-risk pesticides, using the pesticide risk assessment guidelines employed by the City and County of San Francisco. 6. An exemption must be applied for and granted prior to use of any pesticide not listed on the Reduced-Risk Pesticide List, the exemption process requires well documented justification for the variance from pesticide use restrictions and limitations. 7. The CITY's IPMP will include the following components: Integrated Pest Management Plan Page 2 of 22 November 2019 a) Reduce to the maximum extent practicable the use of pesticides. b) Consider taking a "no‐action" approach in addressing certain pest control issues. c) Transition parks and greenbelts to “green” least-toxic pest management. d) Review and consider available non‐chemical options before using a chemical pesticide. e) Identify pests and least toxic methods to control pests. f) Identify, evaluate, and minimize or eliminate conditions that encourage pest problems. g) Comply with all applicable state and federal regulations, including pesticide use and reporting. h) Provide public access to all IPMP information and records. i) Conduct decision‐making based on the best available science and data. j) Provide residents and pest control operator’s information on less toxic methods of pest control. B. IPMP Goals IPMP goals regarding pesticide selection and use include: 1. Use pesticides only when necessary and select a pesticide that is both effective and least toxic. 2. Designate 25 ft. buffers around playgrounds and picnic table areas on CITY property as pesticide‐free zones. 3. No use on plants with edible berries when ripe fruits are present. 4. Educate and train CITY staff in the IPMP practices. 5. Incorporate outreach to schools, Bee City, and local garden clubs and organizations, to encourage participation and contribution to updates of this plan. 6. The City’s land use code sections 17.34 and 18.34 describe the CITY's landscape maintenance and design program. It is the goal of the City to also incorporate the following techniques when feasible and appropriate: a) Identify pollution prevention and source control opportunities; b) Collect and properly dispose of unused pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers; c) Promote soil microbial health through the use of compost, compost tea, or inoculation; d) Use native and/or climate appropriate plants to reduce the amount of water, pesticides and fertilizers used; e) Limit or replace pesticide use with alternatives such as conducting manual weed and insect removal; f) Minimize irrigation run‐off by using best management; g) Manage mowing of grass to allow for greater pollutant removal, but not jeopardizing public safety. 2.0 Pest Control As-needed CITY departments and offices requiring pest control on an as‐needed basis are to adhere the Best Management Practices (BMP) described in this IPMP. Integrated Pest Management Plan Page 3 of 22 November 2019 A. Guidelines for Pest Treatment If it is determined that treatment is needed, the following criteria are to be used in determining the appropriate treatment strategy: 1. Least‐disruptive of natural controls; 2. Least‐hazardous to human health; 3. Least‐toxic to non‐target organisms; 4. Protective of wildlife and the native habitat; 5. Least‐damaging to the general environment; 6. Cultural, biological, and mechanical solutions have been considered and evaluated; 7. Prior treatments used on site to control the pest and an evaluation of the success of that approach; 8. Most likely to produce a permanent reduction in the environment's ability to support target pests; 9. Cost effectiveness in the short and long term. B. Guidelines for Pesticide Selection 1. Development of Reduced-Risk List of Pesticides allowed for Use on CITY Property It is a goal of CITY to minimize the use of pesticides by giving preference to eco‐exempt products and those approved by the Organic Materials Research Institute (OMRI) or
Load more

Recommended publications
  • INDEX to PESTICIDE TYPES and FAMILIES and PART 180 TOLERANCE INFORMATION of PESTICIDE CHEMICALS in FOOD and FEED COMMODITIES
    US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs INDEX to PESTICIDE TYPES and FAMILIES and PART 180 TOLERANCE INFORMATION of PESTICIDE CHEMICALS in FOOD and FEED COMMODITIES Note: Pesticide tolerance information is updated in the Code of Federal Regulations on a weekly basis. EPA plans to update these indexes biannually. These indexes are current as of the date indicated in the pdf file. For the latest information on pesticide tolerances, please check the electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR) at http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/40cfrv23_07.html 1 40 CFR Type Family Common name CAS Number PC code 180.163 Acaricide bridged diphenyl Dicofol (1,1-Bis(chlorophenyl)-2,2,2-trichloroethanol) 115-32-2 10501 180.198 Acaricide phosphonate Trichlorfon 52-68-6 57901 180.259 Acaricide sulfite ester Propargite 2312-35-8 97601 180.446 Acaricide tetrazine Clofentezine 74115-24-5 125501 180.448 Acaricide thiazolidine Hexythiazox 78587-05-0 128849 180.517 Acaricide phenylpyrazole Fipronil 120068-37-3 129121 180.566 Acaricide pyrazole Fenpyroximate 134098-61-6 129131 180.572 Acaricide carbazate Bifenazate 149877-41-8 586 180.593 Acaricide unclassified Etoxazole 153233-91-1 107091 180.599 Acaricide unclassified Acequinocyl 57960-19-7 6329 180.341 Acaricide, fungicide dinitrophenol Dinocap (2, 4-Dinitro-6-octylphenyl crotonate and 2,6-dinitro-4- 39300-45-3 36001 octylphenyl crotonate} 180.111 Acaricide, insecticide organophosphorus Malathion 121-75-5 57701 180.182 Acaricide, insecticide cyclodiene Endosulfan 115-29-7 79401
    [Show full text]
  • Sound Management of Pesticides and Diagnosis and Treatment Of
    * Revision of the“IPCS - Multilevel Course on the Safe Use of Pesticides and on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Presticide Poisoning, 1994” © World Health Organization 2006 All rights reserved. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall the World Health Organization be liable for damages arising from its use. CONTENTS Preface Acknowledgement Part I. Overview 1. Introduction 1.1 Background 1.2 Objectives 2. Overview of the resource tool 2.1 Moduledescription 2.2 Training levels 2.3 Visual aids 2.4 Informationsources 3. Using the resource tool 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Training trainers 3.2.1 Organizational aspects 3.2.2 Coordinator’s preparation 3.2.3 Selection of participants 3.2.4 Before training trainers 3.2.5 Specimen module 3.3 Trainers 3.3.1 Trainer preparation 3.3.2 Selection of participants 3.3.3 Organizational aspects 3.3.4 Before a course 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Chemical Name Federal P Code CAS Registry Number Acutely
    Acutely / Extremely Hazardous Waste List Federal P CAS Registry Acutely / Extremely Chemical Name Code Number Hazardous 4,7-Methano-1H-indene, 1,4,5,6,7,8,8-heptachloro-3a,4,7,7a-tetrahydro- P059 76-44-8 Acutely Hazardous 6,9-Methano-2,4,3-benzodioxathiepin, 6,7,8,9,10,10- hexachloro-1,5,5a,6,9,9a-hexahydro-, 3-oxide P050 115-29-7 Acutely Hazardous Methanimidamide, N,N-dimethyl-N'-[2-methyl-4-[[(methylamino)carbonyl]oxy]phenyl]- P197 17702-57-7 Acutely Hazardous 1-(o-Chlorophenyl)thiourea P026 5344-82-1 Acutely Hazardous 1-(o-Chlorophenyl)thiourea 5344-82-1 Extremely Hazardous 1,1,1-Trichloro-2, -bis(p-methoxyphenyl)ethane Extremely Hazardous 1,1a,2,2,3,3a,4,5,5,5a,5b,6-Dodecachlorooctahydro-1,3,4-metheno-1H-cyclobuta (cd) pentalene, Dechlorane Extremely Hazardous 1,1a,3,3a,4,5,5,5a,5b,6-Decachloro--octahydro-1,2,4-metheno-2H-cyclobuta (cd) pentalen-2- one, chlorecone Extremely Hazardous 1,1-Dimethylhydrazine 57-14-7 Extremely Hazardous 1,2,3,4,10,10-Hexachloro-6,7-epoxy-1,4,4,4a,5,6,7,8,8a-octahydro-1,4-endo-endo-5,8- dimethanonaph-thalene Extremely Hazardous 1,2,3-Propanetriol, trinitrate P081 55-63-0 Acutely Hazardous 1,2,3-Propanetriol, trinitrate 55-63-0 Extremely Hazardous 1,2,4,5,6,7,8,8-Octachloro-4,7-methano-3a,4,7,7a-tetra- hydro- indane Extremely Hazardous 1,2-Benzenediol, 4-[1-hydroxy-2-(methylamino)ethyl]- 51-43-4 Extremely Hazardous 1,2-Benzenediol, 4-[1-hydroxy-2-(methylamino)ethyl]-, P042 51-43-4 Acutely Hazardous 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane 96-12-8 Extremely Hazardous 1,2-Propylenimine P067 75-55-8 Acutely Hazardous 1,2-Propylenimine 75-55-8 Extremely Hazardous 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,8-Octachloro-1,3,3a,4,7,7a-hexahydro-4,7-methanoisobenzofuran Extremely Hazardous 1,3-Dithiolane-2-carboxaldehyde, 2,4-dimethyl-, O- [(methylamino)-carbonyl]oxime 26419-73-8 Extremely Hazardous 1,3-Dithiolane-2-carboxaldehyde, 2,4-dimethyl-, O- [(methylamino)-carbonyl]oxime.
    [Show full text]
  • The List of Extremely Hazardous Substances)
    APPENDIX A (THE LIST OF EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES) THRESHOLD REPORTABLE INVENTORY RELEASE QUANTITY QUANTITY CAS NUMBER CHEMICAL NAME (POUNDS) (POUNDS) 75-86-5 ACETONE CYANOHYDRIN 500 10 1752-30-3 ACETONE THIOSEMICARBAZIDE 500/500 1,000 107-02-8 ACROLEIN 500 1 79-06-1 ACRYLAMIDE 500/500 5,000 107-13-1 ACRYLONITRILE 500 100 814-68-6 ACRYLYL CHLORIDE 100 100 111-69-3 ADIPONITRILE 500 1,000 116-06-3 ALDICARB 100/500 1 309-00-2 ALDRIN 500/500 1 107-18-6 ALLYL ALCOHOL 500 100 107-11-9 ALLYLAMINE 500 500 20859-73-8 ALUMINUM PHOSPHIDE 500 100 54-62-6 AMINOPTERIN 500/500 500 78-53-5 AMITON 500 500 3734-97-2 AMITON OXALATE 100/500 100 7664-41-7 AMMONIA 500 100 300-62-9 AMPHETAMINE 500 1,000 62-53-3 ANILINE 500 5,000 88-05-1 ANILINE,2,4,6-TRIMETHYL- 500 500 7783-70-2 ANTIMONY PENTAFLUORIDE 500 500 1397-94-0 ANTIMYCIN A 500/500 1,000 86-88-4 ANTU 500/500 100 1303-28-2 ARSENIC PENTOXIDE 100/500 1 THRESHOLD REPORTABLE INVENTORY RELEASE QUANTITY QUANTITY CAS NUMBER CHEMICAL NAME (POUNDS) (POUNDS) 1327-53-3 ARSENOUS OXIDE 100/500 1 7784-34-1 ARSENOUS TRICHLORIDE 500 1 7784-42-1 ARSINE 100 100 2642-71-9 AZINPHOS-ETHYL 100/500 100 86-50-0 AZINPHOS-METHYL 10/500 1 98-87-3 BENZAL CHLORIDE 500 5,000 98-16-8 BENZENAMINE, 3-(TRIFLUOROMETHYL)- 500 500 100-14-1 BENZENE, 1-(CHLOROMETHYL)-4-NITRO- 500/500 500 98-05-5 BENZENEARSONIC ACID 10/500 10 3615-21-2 BENZIMIDAZOLE, 4,5-DICHLORO-2-(TRI- 500/500 500 FLUOROMETHYL)- 98-07-7 BENZOTRICHLORIDE 100 10 100-44-7 BENZYL CHLORIDE 500 100 140-29-4 BENZYL CYANIDE 500 500 15271-41-7 BICYCLO[2.2.1]HEPTANE-2-CARBONITRILE,5-
    [Show full text]
  • INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE in ALFALFA WEEVIL and RELATED IMPLICATIONS in OTHER ALFALFA INSECT PESTS Michael D
    INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE IN ALFALFA WEEVIL AND RELATED IMPLICATIONS IN OTHER ALFALFA INSECT PESTS Michael D. Rethwisch1, Frank Peairs2, Jane Pierce3, Ayman Mostafa4, Stephen Price5, Ricardo Ramirez6, Silvia Rondon7, Scott Schell8, Jeremiah Vardiman9, Douglas B. Walsh10, Kevin Wanner11, and Erik Wenninger12 ABSTRACT Field failures in controlling alfalfa weevils are becoming more frequent in multiple western states the past several years with insecticide resistance now documented in at least three states (California, Colorado, Washington), primarily to the active ingredient lambda-cyhalothrin (active ingredient in products such as Warrior II with Zeon Technology®). Some states are noting lack of control by chlorpyrifos (active ingredient in products such as Lorsban®) as well. Resistance is highly localized, which reflects both insecticide use pattern and short-range dispersal of alfalfa weevils. Insecticide resistance is expected to necessitate producers to rotate insecticides, often to a more expensive product. In fields that have both damaging levels of aphids and alfalfa weevils, a second insecticide will also probably be necessary as the product currently registered for best alfalfa weevil control based on university trials (indoxacarb, active ingredient in Steward®) has very little activity against aphids. Testing is underway in several states to determine the extent of insecticide resistance. Coordinated testing will be conducted across the western states beginning in 2020. Key Words: Insecticides, alfalfa weevil, resistance, pyrethroid,
    [Show full text]
  • Proposal: Sulfur (As a Molluscicide)
    National Organic Standards Board Crops Subcommittee Petitioned Material Proposal Sulfur as Slug and Snail Bait February 20, 2018 Summary of Sulfur as a Molluscicide Petition: OR CAL, Inc. has petitioned for inclusion of sulfur as a synthetic substance allowed for use in organic crop production under Section 205.601(h) of the National Organic Program’s (NOP) National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances, as a slug and snail bait. The petition notes that elemental sulfur is currently NOP Listed under section 205.601(e)(5) as an insecticide (including acaricide or miticide), 205.601(i) as a plant disease control, and 205.601(j)(2) as a plant or soil amendment. The NOSB also recommended (Fall 2017) the addition of elemental sulfur to the National List for use as a pesticide on domestic livestock (petitioner: Georgia Gulf Sulfur Corporation of Valdosta, Georgia). Many stakeholders have experience with sulfur use in organic agriculture and extensive information is available. The petition provides EPA registration information and pesticide label requirements. The petition relies on the March 2017 Sulfur Livestock technical report for background information. In the original 1995 technical advisory panel (TAP) review, the reviewers found elemental sulfur to be relatively innocuous in the environment when used according to the product use label. It was also found to be of low toxicity. It should not be used within one month of any horticultural oil product, as currently stated on most sulfur labels. An updated draft Technical Report (TR) for sulfur has been completed and reviewed by the NOSB Crops Subcommittee (anticipated publication on NOP website March/April 2017).
    [Show full text]
  • List of Extremely Hazardous Substances
    Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Facility Reporting Compliance Manual List of Extremely Hazardous Substances Threshold Threshold Quantity (TQ) Reportable Planning (pounds) Quantity Quantity (Industry Use (pounds) (pounds) CAS # Chemical Name Only) (Spill/Release) (LEPC Use Only) 75-86-5 Acetone Cyanohydrin 500 10 1,000 1752-30-3 Acetone Thiosemicarbazide 500/500 1,000 1,000/10,000 107-02-8 Acrolein 500 1 500 79-06-1 Acrylamide 500/500 5,000 1,000/10,000 107-13-1 Acrylonitrile 500 100 10,000 814-68-6 Acrylyl Chloride 100 100 100 111-69-3 Adiponitrile 500 1,000 1,000 116-06-3 Aldicarb 100/500 1 100/10,000 309-00-2 Aldrin 500/500 1 500/10,000 107-18-6 Allyl Alcohol 500 100 1,000 107-11-9 Allylamine 500 500 500 20859-73-8 Aluminum Phosphide 500 100 500 54-62-6 Aminopterin 500/500 500 500/10,000 78-53-5 Amiton 500 500 500 3734-97-2 Amiton Oxalate 100/500 100 100/10,000 7664-41-7 Ammonia 500 100 500 300-62-9 Amphetamine 500 1,000 1,000 62-53-3 Aniline 500 5,000 1,000 88-05-1 Aniline, 2,4,6-trimethyl- 500 500 500 7783-70-2 Antimony pentafluoride 500 500 500 1397-94-0 Antimycin A 500/500 1,000 1,000/10,000 86-88-4 ANTU 500/500 100 500/10,000 1303-28-2 Arsenic pentoxide 100/500 1 100/10,000 1327-53-3 Arsenous oxide 100/500 1 100/10,000 7784-34-1 Arsenous trichloride 500 1 500 7784-42-1 Arsine 100 100 100 2642-71-9 Azinphos-Ethyl 100/500 100 100/10,000 86-50-0 Azinphos-Methyl 10/500 1 10/10,000 98-87-3 Benzal Chloride 500 5,000 500 98-16-8 Benzenamine, 3-(trifluoromethyl)- 500 500 500 100-14-1 Benzene, 1-(chloromethyl)-4-nitro- 500/500
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 Theinternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) Was Established in 1980
    The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 cation Hazard of Pesticides by and Guidelines to Classi The WHO Recommended Classi The WHO Recommended Classi cation of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classi cation 2019 The WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification 2019 TheInternational Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS) was established in 1980. The overall objectives of the IPCS are to establish the scientific basis for assessment of the risk to human health and the environment from exposure to chemicals, through international peer review processes, as a prerequisite for the promotion of chemical safety, and to provide technical assistance in strengthening national capacities for the sound management of chemicals. This publication was developed in the IOMC context. The contents do not necessarily reflect the views or stated policies of individual IOMC Participating Organizations. The Inter-Organization Programme for the Sound Management of Chemicals (IOMC) was established in 1995 following recommendations made by the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development to strengthen cooperation and increase international coordination in the field of chemical safety. The Participating Organizations are: FAO, ILO, UNDP, UNEP, UNIDO, UNITAR, WHO, World Bank and OECD. The purpose of the IOMC is to promote coordination of the policies and activities pursued by the Participating Organizations, jointly or separately, to achieve the sound management of chemicals in relation to human health and the environment. WHO recommended classification of pesticides by hazard and guidelines to classification, 2019 edition ISBN 978-92-4-000566-2 (electronic version) ISBN 978-92-4-000567-9 (print version) ISSN 1684-1042 © World Health Organization 2020 Some rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. EPA, Pesticide Product Label, BARDAC MOLLUSCICIDE, 12/22
    ~ 'f; -< .0 - .:,.;...n:::., I f0!1:-~)-- • \ EPA REGISTRA TlON NO. uS ENVIRONMENTAl PROTECTION AGENCY IDAnE~r.IS;?C~l "/ OFFICE OF PESTICIDES PROGRAMS 6836-203 I REGISTRAllON DMStOH(Ts·ml TERM OF' ISSUANCE •• WASHINGTON. OC204«l j"-' NA.. E OF PESTICIDE PRODUCT NOTICE OF PESTICIDE: 0 AECISTRATION o IU:RECISTRATION (Under the Fedel.' Insecticide, F...,icide. Bardac Molluscicide and Rodenticide Act. S~ • ..-..Ied) MAME AND ADDRESS OF REGISTRANT (lac,.. ZIP c.de) r Lanza, Inc 17-17 Route 208 Fair Lawn, NJ 07410 L ...J NOTE: Changes in labeling formula differinc in substance from th.t accepted in connection with this ree:istration must be submitted to and accepted by the ReCistt.lion Division pdor to use of the label in commerce. In any correspondence on this pcoduct al._ys refer to the above U.S. EPA recislration number. ' On the basis of information fwnished by the recistrant. the above named pesticide is hereby Re&istered/Reregistered under ) the Federa. Insecticide. Funcicide. aad Rodenticide Act. A copy of the labeling accepted in coonection with this Registration!Reregistration is returned herewith. Re&istration is in no way tn be construed as an indorsement or a PP'ova I cl this product by this Agency. In order to protect health and the environment, the Administrator, on his motion, may at any time s.uspend or cancel the registration or a pest­ icide in accordance with the Act. The acceptance of any name in conraection with the re&islration or a product under this Act is not to be construed as eivinc the recistrant a right to exclusiVe" use of the name or to its use ir it has been covered by others.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of the Molluscicide Metaldehyde in the Environment Environmental Science Water Research & Technology
    Volume 3 Number 3 May 2017 Pages 381–574 Environmental Science Water Research & Technology rsc.li/es-water ISSN 2053-1400 CRITICAL REVIEW G. R. Fones et al. Review of the molluscicide metaldehyde in the environment Environmental Science Water Research & Technology View Article Online CRITICAL REVIEW View Journal | View Issue Review of the molluscicide metaldehyde in the Cite this: Environ. Sci.: Water Res. environment Technol., 2017, 3,415 G. D. Castle,a G. A. Mills,b A. Gravell,c L. Jones,d I. Townsend,d D. G. Camerone and G. R. Fones *a Metaldehyde is the active ingredient in most slug pellets used to protect crops. This molluscicide is consid- ered an emerging pollutant and is frequently detected in surface water bodies above the EU statutory drinking water limit of 0.1 μgL−1 for a pesticide. This presents a challenge for providers of drinking water. Received 4th February 2017, Understanding the sources, transport and environmental fate of this compound is therefore important. This Accepted 10th April 2017 critical review discusses these aspects including monitoring and analytical techniques used for the detec- tion of metaldehyde in environmental matrices. Novel techniques used for the removal of metaldehyde DOI: 10.1039/c7ew00039a from drinking water are presented together with potential catchment management strategies and initiatives rsc.li/es-water useful for the mitigation of this molluscicide in the environment. Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported Licence. Water impact Metaldehyde is a potent molluscicide and is applied to land as baited-pellets. Due to its physicochemical properties, metaldehyde runs off readily from fields and enters surface water bodies where often it can be present at drinking water capitation sites at elevated concentrations.
    [Show full text]
  • Livestock Pest Management: a Training Manual for Commercial Pesticide Applicators (Category 1D)
    Livestock Pest Management: A Training Manual for Commercial Pesticide Applicators (Category 1D) Edward D. Walker Julie A. Stachecki 1 Preface This manual is intended to prepare pesticide Materials from several sources were used to com- applicators in category 1D, livestock pest man- pile this information with input from North Car- agement, for certification under the Act 451, Nat- olina Extension, Key to Insect and Mites; Fly ural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, Control in Confined Livestock and Poultry Pro- Part 83, Pesticide Control, Sections 8301 to 8336. duction, Ciba-Geigy Agricultural Division, Read the introduction to this manual to under- Greensboro, NC; Managing Insect Problems on stand your responsibilities for obtaining the Beef Cattle, Kansas State University, Manhattan, appropriate credentials to apply pesticides and KS; Poultry Pest Management for Pennsylvania how to use this manual. and the Northeast, The Pennsylvania State Uni- versity, Extension Service, College of Agriculture, Acknowledgements University Park, PA; Pest Management Principles for the Commercial Applicator: Animal Pest Con- This manual, “Livestock Pest Management: A trol, University of Wisconsin Extension, Madison, Training Manual for Commercial Pesticide Appli- WI; and External Parasites of Poultry, Purdue cators (Category 1D),” was produced by Michi- University Extension, West Lafayette, IN, pho- gan State University, Pesticide Education tographs from Harlan Ritchie, Michigan State Program in conjunction with the Michigan University, East Lansing, MI, Ned Walker, Michi- Department of Agriculture. The following people gan State University, East Lansing, MI, Vocational are recognized for their reviews, suggestions and Education Publications, California Polytechnic contributions to this manual: State University San Luis Obispo, CA, Ralph Cle- George Atkeson, Ionia county agriculture agent, venger, Santa Rosa, CA, and Lepp and Associates, Michigan State University Extension, Ionia, MI Los Osis, CA.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Pesticide Reporting Guidelines
    Florida Pesticide Reporting guidelines This list is compiled from the Environmental Protection Agency List of Lists (2015) and updated with common Pesticide Trade Names. This is meant as a supplement to the EPA list of lists to clarify and assist handlers and responders in the field to Florida reporting requirements and the more common chemical nomenclature. Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) – The presence of Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHSs) in quantities at or above the Threshold Planning Quantity (TPQ) requires certain emergency planning activities to be conducted. The consolidated list presents the TPQ (in pounds) for section 302 chemicals in the column following the CAS number. For chemicals that are solids, there are two TPQs given (e.g., 500/10,000). In these cases, the lower quantity applies for solids in powder form with particle size less than 100 microns, or if the substance is in solution or in molten form. Otherwise, the 10,000 pound TPQ applies. Section 304 RQ‐ Facilities must immediately report accidental releases of EHS chemicals and "hazardous substances" in quantities greater than corresponding Reportable Quantities (RQs) defined under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) to state and local officials. Information about accidental chemical releases must be available to the public, Florida Reporting requirements below. CERCLA RQ‐ Releases of CERCLA hazardous substances, in quantities equal to or greater than their reportable quantity (RQ) in pounds, are subject to reporting to the Florida Reporting requirements below. Florida Reporting requirements: National Response Center Florida State Watch Office (800) 424-8802 (800) 320-0519 or (850) 815-4001 Florida Department of Environmental Protection Spill reporting requirements https://floridadep.gov/pollutionnotice Florida Division of Emergency Management 2555 Shumard Oak blvd.
    [Show full text]